To James: Why are you ranting? Man, don't even try it with me or else, Buster! And when did your name become Magnus Anderson?To Magnus: Stop with your pessimistic assumptions that no one will help and ask, for crying out loud.

I have seen men in situations where I couldn't offer them the help that they wanted due to concerns for my safety. For instance, men as stranded motorists quickly become angry creatures especially late at night.

I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.

Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic HarmonyElseFrom THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is"..

I have no doubt that you may be correct. However I was only offering my own interpretation.

Hopefully this response will shed more light on the matter of influence - with any luck it should make sense.

Arminius wrote:Information, yes, but if "we all seek to influence each other", as you said, then this can be reduced to Hegel's "desire to get recognition (appreciation)" or to Nietzsche's "will to power".

I think that Hegel's "desire to get recognition (appreciation)" is the basis, thus also the basis of the following examples:

James S Saint wrote:

companionship

useful information

ego support

yearning for a life

social influence

sense of social acceptance

I don't know enough about Hegel or Nietzsche to comment. I am doing my best to break things down to their simplest components. Talking it seems to me is primarily about making noise and secondarily about getting a point across. Communication on the internet is a slightly different construct.

For example:

When we are babies we cry - something drives us to make a noise in the first place. Is the cry not a form of communication?

Many young creatures in their early stages make a noise - quite often for a reason.

After we have finished our many bouts of crying we tend to move into a more benign mode of making seemingly random noise(often times rather adorable).

Before we move onto articulating more structured sounds, it seems that crying and laughing are two of the earliest sounds that indicate emotional states.

Eventually our first words come into being. Whether we truly understand our first words the first time we use them is unknown to me.

We may never have known ourselves to begin with. By talking we are able to reflect off others who we are.

I am working with the idea that desires exist in some sort of hierarchy that is built up over time. Before we started talking and understanding the noise that came out of our mouths I can only assume that we were not really aware of that desire. For now I am not really certain how else I can put this.

Regarding influence then, I am saying that part of the motivation when we have the desire to talk, is to influence for good or bad - whatever the case may be. But would influence not be at a much lower level such as when the baby cries she or he might be unintentionally influencing one of her or his parents? I am not certain how the baby might be intending power, however recognition is probable - in the early stages perhaps less conscious.

But yes - it boils down to information - lots of it - the more the better. Communication is all about information.

I suggest in the case of the baby that the health of the group(being the family) as a whole is at times based on the baby's influence and is rather innocent - but I am certain that we could debate that too - especially on ILP. I view the family as a unit of society.

Magnus Anderson wrote:Women talk because they want others to solve their problems.Men don't because they want to solve their problems on their own.

As for the first part, some men, some women.

INDIVIDUALS talk/discuss/brainstorm because it allows them to gain insight through their words and the words of others. If they are paying attention at the same time some things may perhaps come to them.

Then there are times when talking doesn't actually solve problems. It is the NOT talking, not thinking, which will actually make it happen at some point...being above thought.

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

Can posting in a philosophy forum be considered to be similar to talking much?

No. Talking is the involuntary movement of the lips which usually involves spontaneous thought so is the least intellectually demanding form of communication

I understand what you are saying but posting in a forum, at least to me, can still be considered to be *talking* conveying words, thoughts. Also, have you never sensed *spontaneous thought* in here?I wonder, if in the past when a group of philosophers got together, how least-intellectually demanding their philosophical discussions were? Is it possible that there discussions became so heated that they could be heard down the block? Can sign language be considered as *talking*?

Posting on a philosophy forum [ or indeed any forum for that matter ] requires logical thinking and correct grammar. So it is therefore a more demanding form of communication

Possibly less demanding then you think when you have viewed particular threads/posts in here. But I can agree with you in part. On the other hand, depending on who the individual is, there are some philosophers who may be just as meticulous and demanding of their self when it comes to *talking* philosophy. I don't think that anything is just one way or another.

One is usually posting alone from ones computer so there is no social aspect to it either. I have no problem with this form for I am a recluse

Perhaps I am wrong in my thinking but there is the social aspect to it I think insofar as people are communicating with one another.But I understand your perspective, from your hermetical leaning.

who keeps himself to himself. So I like reading and writing words much more than I like speaking them. I cannot avoid not speaking at all but I try to keep it to an absolute minimum. I also much prefer listening to talking but prefer being alone most of all

And that's okay if that is the way you choose to be obviously.But still, can you actually say that there is not at least, and then some, some amount or modicum of socializing?

Are you an island floating around without any connection or relating to others? I don't think so.

Nice speaking with you, surreptitious. I'm glad that at times you come out of your cave.

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

Magnus Anderson wrote:Women talk because they want others to solve their problems.Men don't because they want to solve their problems on their own.

As for the first part, some men, some women.

INDIVIDUALS talk/discuss/brainstorm because it allows them to gain insight through their words and the words of others. If they are paying attention at the same time some things may perhaps come to them.

Then there are times when talking doesn't actually solve problems. It is the NOT talking, not thinking, which will actually make it happen at some point...being above thought.

True. And it is a mistake to think that women in a relationship are complaining because they want the man to solve the problem. Most of the time, she merely wants comforting through her struggle. Men often annoy women by trying to solve their "problems". What they sense as their real problems are seldom what they are talking about. They merely hint at their deeper issues while using talking and complaining to try to better posture for sake of the actual hidden concern (often indecipherable even to themselves).

Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic HarmonyElseFrom THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is"..

True. And it is a mistake to think that women in a relationship are complaining because they want the man to solve the problem

.

But there are women who are like that and there are men who are like that.

Most of the time, she merely wants comforting through her struggle.

But for those who are not, I agree with you. Sometimes all a woman really wants IS the comfort of the man's presence through her struggling. And that does not make a woman weak, it just makes her human.And a woman may do the same for a man, through his struggling.Good relationships have a give and take dynamic within them.

Men often annoy women by trying to solve their "problems".

I wonder why that is? Are they trying to be *helpful* or are those men actually feeling some insecurity in the woman's presence? It might more simply be that the man has been indoctrinated to believe that he has to indeed BE THE MAN and think for the woman. No relationship is perfect.

What they sense as their real problems are seldom what they are talking about.

Oh, I intuit this. Very often, what we view as the real problem is nothing to do with what is actually going on. What we think is not the case.

They merely hint at their deeper issues while using talking and complaining to try to better posture for sake of the actual hidden concern (often indecipherable even to themselves).

I may be wrong but perhaps if there was more self-trust and other trust, they might share more intimately, even if they feel the fear because of that, and get at the real root of the problem, which may have begun eons before. This way all of that projection might begin to be let go of.

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

James S Saint wrote:It is a mistake to think that women in a relationship are complaining because they want the man to solve the problem.

Agreed. At the first possible instance especially. The only exception I see to this is that if the man created the problem then maybe the woman is complaining because of it, however if he is discerning enough and takes away his arrogance then he can easily see the error in his way and move onto solving the problem.

James S Saint wrote:Most of the time, she merely wants comforting through her struggle. Men often annoy women by trying to solve their "problems".

Agreed.

James S Saint wrote:What they sense as their real problems are seldom what they are talking about.

I have experienced this - I know with good communication that women will happily come straight to the point. I have found when they are not being open it is usually because of something I have done or something they are perceiving I have done.

James S Saint wrote:They merely hint at their deeper issues while using talking and complaining to try to better posture for sake of the actual hidden concern (often indecipherable even to themselves).

I do not entirely agree with this however. This to me seems to be a situation that they have been placed into and through influence they tend to maintain that situation. Women however remain one of the biggest mysteries at least in my universe.

Void_X_Zero wrote:We talk because that is how we work things out, how we learn. Dialogue is disclosure of knowledge. We are always talking, either to others or to ourselves.

And freedom to dialogue as openly as possible is a prerequisite for the greatest possible amount of disclosures to occur. This is why retarded elements on both the left and the right are afraid of dialogue in certain directions and want to shut down free speech and free thought. There are truths they do not want to know or have to confront.

Yeah I agree with what you are saying for the most part. What is an example of one of the truths they do not want to know or have to confront? The answer to this may provide some insight into: Why do people sometimes have no desire to listen?

Perhaps someone else might have an idea on this one - I am not really well versed in politics.

James S Saint wrote:They merely hint at their deeper issues while using talking and complaining to try to better posture for sake of the actual hidden concern (often indecipherable even to themselves).

I do not entirely agree with this however. This to me seems to be a situation that they have been placed into and through influence they tend to maintain that situation. Women however remain one of the biggest mysteries at least in my universe.

With what are you disagreeing?

Perhaps for a future thread; a discussion concerning suspicion, blame, fear of judgment, and hyper-defensiveness.

Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic HarmonyElseFrom THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is"..

James S Saint wrote:They merely hint at their deeper issues while using talking and complaining to try to better posture for sake of the actual hidden concern (often indecipherable even to themselves).

I do not entirely agree with this however. This to me seems to be a situation that they have been placed into and through influence they tend to maintain that situation. Women however remain one of the biggest mysteries at least in my universe.

With what are you disagreeing?

Perhaps for a future thread; a discussion concerning suspicion, blame, fear of judgment, and hyper-defensiveness.

I am not too certain why I was looking at this in a way I thought different - perhaps mental exhaustion.

So now that I see how we agree here - This to me seems to be a situation that women have been placed into and through influence they tend to maintain that situation. I am wondering how it came to be the case that for the most part women have come to shut themselves off from men. I am thinking that men have given them some sort of reason not to have trust - at least part of that reason. So when a woman talks to a man - social influence dictates to her to proceed with caution. First of all she starts out with innocent inquiry and quickly learns the tricky nature of him.

Like you say: Perhaps for a future thread; a discussion concerning suspicion, blame, fear of judgment, and hyper-defensiveness.

People need to express experience. Talking is one way to do this. It is an externalization of ongoing internal dialog. To say something out loud allows one to hear it, which may sound different than thinking it. To talk to someone, if alternated with listening, allows for feedback and exchange from completely other than oneself.

James S Saint wrote:And it is a mistake to think that women in a relationship are complaining because they want the man to solve the problem.

It often is the case. They expect problems to be solved, and when they are not, they complain.As I've said, this is because unlike men they are unable to accept reality if it is unpleasant i.e. if it triggers strong negative emotional reactions.Basically, when it suggests negative consequences.They are control freaks.They can't accept that they don't have control over the situation.Instead, they have to pretend that they do.They feel more comfortable that way.When she is worried about something, e.g. about her children, and her husband does not react fast enough to solve the problem, say because he simply can't, she is less likely to accept the fact that nothing can be done about the situation (at least within the timeframe that she desires) and more likely to lose any respect she has for him and become hysterical.For example, she may aggressively demand from him to do something ignoring the fact that he already is trying to do something.Very common sight.The approach is entirely ineffective -- it's destructive -- but she does not care about that.

I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.-- Mr. Reasonable

Nagarjuna wrote:People need to express experience. Talking is one way to do this. It is an externalization of ongoing internal dialog. To say something out loud allows one to hear it, which may sound different than thinking it. To talk to someone, if alternated with listening, allows for feedback and exchange from completely other than oneself.

Perhaps because nothing is as it seems - even internally. So to externalize our experience of our ongoing internal dialog which defines our self-concept in a relative and rudimentary way, we are able to hear ourselves and others are able to listen and provide feedback and exchange to reinforce the self-concept of both parties involved.

Sometimes we do not have the desire to talk to someone because we perceive a threat to our self-concept.

Other times we have a desire to talk to someone because the connection we perceive we have with them gives us hope that they can help build our self-concept.

Because nothing is as it seems - we become uncomfortable - we seek to clarify our own reality using our mind - emotion drives us to seek a rational resolution - in other words we desire to seek the disappearance of a symptom or condition that leads to discomfort and further confusion and subsequently we have the desire to talk. This makes me wonder whether talking(and communication(information[language])) once we understand it is mainly driven by emotions; I say this because sometimes we are seeking a rational conclusion to a faulty piece of logic contained within our mind.

I like your answer. John Donne's meditation is a great touch - for indeed "No Man Is an Island".

Yes, I like how it speaks to/points out the inter-connectedness of humans.

....And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

Reminds me of the below:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.~~~ Martin Niemoller

I have in my mind the personal desire to talk and as well the social desires to talk

Do you mean intimate conversation and social chit chat?

- with social acceptance we develop these new desires that are collective and sit next to our very own desires. Some of these desires that are social require belief to come into being - I think this is the case with a lot of religion and science.

Oh, I think I get it now. Collective is a good word for it I think. Yes, shared beliefs create a really strong social order. Could be highly beneficial or highly detrimental as in Nazism.

We desire the truth

Do we really, do you think? Or perhaps what we desire is our own made-up version of the truth to fit in with our beliefs and desires. Perhaps I am more skeptical than is best for me to be.

- and when we find something that makes sense to us we tend to lend it some belief - any institution is just a case of what makes the most sense to the most people. When we are not happy with any given institution that has become a big part of us we tend to look for answers elsewhere.

Exactly. Do you think that this shows a good thing, a wise and intelligent thing? I don't know. I just want your estimation.

Through talk or writ people are able to produce or maintain their self and sometimes a new institution is born . . .

True ~~ and too many of them for my liking. Well, that would depend on what they were. Let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

We desire to talk because we are basically all social creatures, interconnected with one another though at times we may not realize this. It is through the talking, the sharing, that we sometimes come to know this for the first time, each time."

We are indeed social creatures and our social desires are not our own - our desire to talk can be both our own and social - personal and social.

I don't quite follow you here. I may not be *seeing* something here but why make a distinction between the two - our own and social?

When a person wants to know themselves they are trying to remove the social noise from their internal environment.

This I do get. Things like meditation, reflection, solitude...ad continuum.Also, others can clue us in about who we are if we are willing to listen. Again, No Man is an Island.

The overproduction of reality was a problem that I was facing at a simpler level and I think that through communication we are somehow able to deconstruct these overproduction's and store these results mentally as some sort of reference/s that propagate both ways to what is being referenced and to the reference/s.

I'm probably wrong here. I've been wrong one or two times in my life ( ) but are you plainly put, speaking about *thinking too much*? Please explain if you care to. Well, then again, an *overproduction of reality* can also be, to me, when everything (reality) becomes too pressing at the same time and overwhelming. When that time happens I think that we need *down* time quiet time , a long long walk alone, ALONE TIME and being sure to take all of the bats out of the belfry so to speak -- QUIETING OF THE MIND time. It so feng shuis the mind.

"The desire to talk, at times, the need to talk, is spiritually/emotionally speaking, as important as eating and drinking."

"It is nourishing for the human psyche. If we are unable in some ways to communicate, to *relate* to others, we can shrivel up and die."

Our emotional state then becomes a type of "it all OK" or "its not all OK" flag. When all is OK then the white flag is raised and when all is not OK then the battle flag is raised. Talking becomes the medium to help each person ascertain their social state.

HMMM... Maybe I'm misunderstanding you were. I was speaking of a more profound sharing. Are you speaking here in terms of a *rant and rave* thing?

So as we continue our exploration we encounter many other things that are related to our desire to talk

.

Yes and to read read read.

From here we start developing abilities to ask the right questions - the right questions are related to our own desire and what is socially acceptable to ask.

I don't understand your *socially-acceptable to ask* unless it is a question which is highly personal and that can be in the mind of the beholder.

When we ask the wrong question our ability "to *relate* to others" becomes diminished. It also follows that for the answers - .

You have to establish what the wrong questions are, what YOU mean by the wrong question, encode_decode.Are there wrong questions? Who knows. It might depend on the individual being asked, no?Some people are more open and some people are more reserved and private. But I'm not sure what you are speaking of here.

if we do not offer answers when asked questions then our ability "to *relate* to others" becomes diminished

Are we speaking philosophy here or people asking questions on a more personal level?Explain yourself, Mr. List!

Take care

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

"There is the more intimate kind of sharing, which is more profound and meaningful and satisfying, which allows us silly humans to feel connected on a much deeper level, where people may see us at our core, a place where we actually *live* and breathe that is not shared with many. Without this, many go hungry and loneliness creeps in."

And within a society obsessed with the notion -- and upkeep -- of a personal self and the freedoms related to that self, one needs to keep propagating it: self survival! If needed, indeed even through silly, void conversations.

So are you saying that *self* and *ego* are negatives and detrimental?Or are you speaking of those who, for instance, have conversations which ONLY center around their self, needs, desires, world?

"I intuit that at times it is the sharing, the intimacy, even the every day run-of-the-mill conversations which can bring us to a further understanding of what those desires are. I think that half of the time we do not even realize them."

I think you might be correct. I would say that we have many desires but our desire to talk is closer to the primordial.

That's an interesting and provoking statement. I could be *flip* and just say perhaps because our ancestors - way back - way back! -shared the same primordial soup, gook. But it's a good question to ponder. Aside from needing one another in a universal sense to take away the sting of aloneness, though those self-imposed alonenesses can be wonderful, we also did evolve at some point from other little social creatures, well not from them but away from them. lol You know what I mean.

By bouncing topics of conversation off each other we are then able to come to realize our desires - providing we can filter out the noise of an overproduced social reality - in which case meditating on interactions is a useful tool to separate out ourselves from our social interaction.

This what is done in ILP, right? It's a useful tool to discover our beliefs/perspectives and hopefully how much they are or may not be in line with reality.

But I realize that you are speaking of the more personal sense here.I agree with you. I think it can be beneficial to call to mind conversations, any kind of interactions with others. We can get to know who we are by the way in which we relate to others. It also shows what we are *missing* from ourselves.

"We can't ask the right questions if we do not know what we are *about* just as we cannot ask the right questions, philosophically speaking, in a forum, unless we have an idea of what IS and what we are looking for, to know."

"We" how ever is not limited to just "oneself" but a group or many groups of people. To feel complete as an individual is what most people are trying to achieve one way or the other. One of my friends once said to me "within each one of us is a little bit of dictator", immediately I laughed but I do see some truth in it - his perception of reality.

True. I don't recall if I was using the *universal* we or not. But that's true.We desire to be made whole and be in harmony with all things. Many of us do anyway. I can agree with your friend ~ and ~ sometimes we are dictators to our own selves.I think that the more patient we can learn to be with ourselves, the more patient we will tend to be with others - and visa versa.

- harmony on the other hand would rely on the pair of us coming to a complete understanding on the topic- given subjective reality we could never truly know whether that has been achieved or not.

But isn't there also harmony within the choice two people make to *agree to disagree* with graciousness? But I understand how you are using the word - a form of achieved synergy.

Is red the same to you as it is to me? How could we know?

I am not a particular fan of *red* though pomegranate seeds are beautiful, they shimmer like rubies in the light. But I suppose that that isn't true either. I do like red in certain things of nature. I do not like red when it comes to fashion. (no idle chit chat here).But I think that if I were to describe how certain colors make me feel, you would know my sense of qualia toward it. Language allows us to tell others how we feel if we really *feel* it.

The simplest words spoken to make us feel connected: You are my friend. I understand. I get where you are coming from. et cetera.

A few thoughts come to mind. Unless I am losing my mind - that is also a possibility.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Well, if you are losing your mind, then it is a good thing that you recognize the possibility and you can do something about it. I'm kidding of course ~~ but there is truth in that, but would someone who is losing their mind be aware of that?

I wonder what one could do about it if they were losing their mind. I somewhat agree with WendyDarling here - there is degree of possibility that a person can identify when they are losing their mind. I think too that there is a degree as to which somebody could imagine that they are losing their mind too.

Arcturus Descending wrote:But why, pray tell, do you see that as a possibility?

When it comes to my mind, I always allow for the possibility that I could lose it. This is not something that I suggest to everyone. Everybody should exercise their mind to a degree - those that don't might not be aware that they are losing it. Those that use their mind very intensely could be called extreme thinkers; I believe these people could also lose their mind - especially the part that relates to being social.

Are there some questions in life . . . that by searching for the answer . . . can make you lose your sanity?

Is it rhetorical indeed? Sometimes people do though lose their desire to talk. Whether it starts out based on an anti-social tendency or not might hold some clues. Sometimes a person just wants to quiet their mind . . . sometimes a person is so into what they are doing that talking is not an option for them.

There are very likely many different reasons a person might lose their desire to talk. Might I remind you of:

surreptitious57 wrote:I personally have no desire to talk at all preferring writing and reading instead because they are less spontaneous and more intellectual And I therefore keep my lip movements to an absolute minimum which is not hard to do given that I am as reclusive as I can possibly be

I wonder how much we don't know about about the compulsion to talk.

Arcturus Descending wrote:I may be wrong here but that might depend on the individual him/her -self. I think that some of us at the moment when we are feeling compelled to talk, or are aware of that compulsion within ourselves, and are experiencing it through talk, can take a step back and realize where they are coming from, what it is which is triggering it, what fear, et cetera, and can bring it to a slow halt.

Yes but it need not be fear that compels us to talk - I know that you know that. Sometimes we are so excited to share something with someone for what ever reason that we can not contain that something we desire to share so we must get it out by sharing it - in turn talking about it. So many reasons to feel compelled to talk.

One reason for feeling compelled to talk I often wonder about: Why the hell do people offer their opinions at inappropriate times? I might add; and are not usually asked for their opinions in the first place. You know those times when you just want someone to listen to you but they insist on interrupting with an opinion.

Arcturus Descending wrote:There is so very much within us which we are not aware of - what makes us tick.

Isn't that so very true? Why is that I wonder? I am still curious to this day what it is that makes me interested in some of the things that I am interested in.

Is there anything that you are interested in that you can not work out the reason why you are interested in it?

Arcturus Descending wrote:We and our minds are like deep space in a sense, a final frontier the end of which we may never understand.

It puts my mind to a quote that I have used recently from Wikipedia:

Emmanuel Levinas wrote:To approach the other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I, which means exactly: to have the idea of infinity.

A deep space of infinite different possible reasons to talk perhaps - many different possible conversational outcomes.

Are we in constant denial of our individual reality? We have this propensity to talk for many reasons that might totally slip past us undetected. A need to question existence and why it is that we are here and a part of this reality.

Emmanuel Levinas wrote:Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority

To approach the other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I, which means exactly: to have the idea of infinity.

Written words and other words do not suffice because they have become past by the time the subject perceives them. That is: they have fallen into the register of totality.

We register these words in our memory or we write down these words so that they become a part of history - we seem to be obssesed with information and conveying it to each other from our memory or history.

James S Saint wrote:Memory and History

A memory is merely the residue of a perception. It has physical existence in that it affects the physical brain and mind. But with every physical anything, there is also an associated concept. The concept always remains the same concept, but the physical memory eventually falls to entropy.

There is a real history, a perceived history, and proposed history. They are seldom the same. The actual past does not physically exist, rather the past forms a residue that is the present as the present forms a residue to become the future.

In everything you do, you are forming the future and displacing the past.

Because nothing is as it seems; it seems we are in constant denial of our individual reality - constantly questioning, thinking, reading and writing among others things and to what end? Maybe we do seek through communication to build our self-concept or maybe we are just the infinite speaking to the infinite and the medium that we use to convey our words is finite and usually temporary in nature.

Mr List also thought John Donne's meditation was a great touch and how it "speaks to/points out" the inter-connectedness of humans. It is great how one thing can remind us of another as in the case of the snippet from Martin Niemoller.

Intimate conversation and social chit chat are two types of conversation that are always taking place somewhere in the world. It is likely that I am speaking of the personal desire to talk and as well the social desires to talk in my own context here - I was not being specific and what I wrote possibly contains some imprecision. I will however elaborate a little to add a little more precision:

A personal desire could be Independence which is the desire for self-reliance but sometimes we might like others to see us as such, in which case it is probably a social desire. Tranquility could be considered personal and is the desire for emotional calm. To connect and to be taken seriously would be two social desires; we want to feel connected to others, and we want others to take us seriously and to show us respect; we want to be listened to and to have our words considered for their merits rather than being discounted or ignored.

As you are more or less saying, shared beliefs can create a really strong social order and may be highly beneficial or highly detrimental for what ever reason. Further I am saying that with social acceptance we develop these new desires that are collective and sit next to our very own desires; what I mean here is that social desires need to be developed and strengthened for the social creature in question to keep them strong because as is often the case the said social creature is seeking a strong social bond as well as strong social order.

I think the skeptic is also looking for the truth in an around about way. The ability to question the validity of the arguments of others id est what other people are saying, I think is quite healthy. The only reason why we ask questions is because we do not know the answers; this can be further sub-categorized into extending the only reason into something like - it sounds close to the truth but I remain skeptical because it just does not sound quite right and in-turn I still do not completely have the truth. In any case what we desire is our own made-up version of the truth to fit in with our beliefs and desires as you say.

My estimation is . . . that it indeed . . . shows a good thing . . . a wise and intelligent thing . . . when: we find something that makes sense to us, we tend to lend it some belief - any institution is just a case of what makes the most sense to the most people. When we are not happy with any given institution that has become a big part of us we tend to look for answers elsewhere. This plays into the hand of skepticism and as long as an individual is careful then the grass can be verified as greener on the other side of the fence, figuratively speaking.

We are indeed social creatures and our social desires are not our own, they are interconnected as you suggest; our desire to talk can be both our own and social. We desire to talk because we are basically all social creatures, interconnected with one another and it is through the talking, the sharing, that we sometimes come to know this for the first time; that you come to know this for the first time; that I come to know this for the first time. Hopefully this makes things a little clearer.

Again, No Man is an Island.

An *overproduction of reality* is when reality becomes overwhelming and sometimes our logic and emotions wreak havoc here. When that time happens we do need *down* time or quiet time, potentially a long walk alone; ALONE TIME and being sure to take all of the bats out of the belfry so to speak.

QUIETING OF THE MIND time.

Socially speaking when all is OK then the white flag is raised and when all is not OK then the battle flag is raised. Talking or yelling what ever the case may be becomes the medium to help each person ascertain their social state - sometimes we need profound sharing other times we need to put the amour on and go to battle(rant and rave).

There are plainly questions that are socially acceptable to ask and those which are not; as you say some people are more open and some people are more reserved and private - you wont really know if you ask a question and you don't get an answer - I would not let it bother you.

If we do not offer answers when asked questions then our ability "to *relate* to others" becomes diminished; I am saying especially in the case of a forum that if you do not answer a question that was asked of you then the person who asked the question in the first place may not bother asking any further questions of you - and may not even bother adding any more input where you are concerned - this is mostly the case when you do not know them personally.

We should consider when others agree or disagree with us, whether that should bother us or not.

I affirm that we should know when to . . . let it go . . . as it could be for our very own benefit.

Are there some questions in life . . . that by searching for the answer . . . can make you lose your mind?

Could it be fear of what is said, and that words, ideas, thoughts, can be dangerous and damaging? "Honest truth" can be too much to handle? If exposing one's thoughts would mark you as "bad, evil, immoral, amoral" then would that be reason enough to stop talking? How about not speaking about topics and subjects which you know little or nothing about? Is it useful to speak from a perspective of ignorance? Or ought people only speak about the things and facts they know with degrees of certainty?

If you are sick, see symptoms, where do you go? Doctor.If you sense that you may be losing your mind, where do you go? Psychiatrist or psychologist.

I somewhat agree with WendyDarling here - there is degree of possibility that a person can identify when they are losing their mind. I think too that there is a degree as to which somebody could imagine that they are losing their mind too.

A person's mind is a very important thing. Even if someone can imagine it, unless they are just being flip about it and know better, better to take a second glance - then if something points to it, get thee to a P.

But why, pray tell, do you see that as a possibility?

When it comes to my mind, I always allow for the possibility that I could lose it

.

I can agree with you on this insofar as we are all concerned. Human beings can be stretched to a point of no return. We have ONLY so much resilience though some may have a lot more than others. We are like rubber bands in a sense. Stretched too far, what happens? I don't care who someone is.

This is not something that I suggest to everyone. Everybody should exercise their mind to a degree - those that don't might not be aware that they are losing it.

Hmm, I'm not sure about this. I might be wrong though. You might want to tell me what YOU mean above by *exercising* the mind? I basically think and feel that when we become too overwhelmed by life and do not have healthy outlets in which to detach, this is when the mind begins to deteriorate and crumble.

Those that use their mind very intensely could be called extreme thinkers; I believe these people could also lose their mind - especially the part that relates to being social.

True, again, unless they have healthy outlets, unless they give their minds a break and allow them *vacations* or *mini-vacations* from them. Otherwise, they might or will implode/explode.But it might also depend on the individuals themselves. There are many great thinkers and geniuses who did not lose their minds. There have to be other influences also which cause this.

Are there some questions in life . . . that by searching for the answer . . . can make you lose your sanity?

I don't necessarily think that it is about the questions themselves which cause this to happen though I may be wrong here. But I think that it is more how the INDIVIDUALS handle the situation, what daemons (not devils lol) rise up and take over, how each individual psyche is affected.As long as we are able to take a breather from the questions and realize that no answer may come and we can accept this negative capability- we could be fine.Love the questions but don't allow them to rule our lives and to destroy them.

As Rilke said, the answers may come to us as we live our lives. (paraphrased).Love the questions for what they are, respect them for what they are, be enthralled by them for what they are, but don't allow them to enslave us.

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

Is it rhetorical indeed? Sometimes people do though lose their desire to talk. Whether it starts out based on an anti-social tendency or not might hold some clues. Sometimes a person just wants to quiet their mind . . . sometimes a person is so into what they are doing that talking is not an option for them.

What you say above is true. Also, a deeper reason which may give a warning is depression or falling into a depression. Unfortunately, the very thing which just MIGHT help depression and feeling such a sense of being overwhelmed and falling in a black hole is talking to someone that one trusts. Aside from that, as I said in a latter post that person needs to get him/her -self to a Psychiatrist or Psychologist.

I think that there is a distinction between losing one's desire to talk and detaching from that desire in the moment[s].We value our quiet time, our solitude, and are very possessive of that.

There are very likely many different reasons a person might lose their desire to talk. Might I remind you of:

"surreptitious57"]I personally have no desire to talk at all preferring writing and reading instead because they are less spontaneous and more intellectual And I therefore keep my lip movements to an absolute minimum which is not hard to do given that I am as reclusive as I can possibly be

I am aware. That is all I can say here.

I wonder how much we don't know about about the compulsion to talk.

I would hazard a guess that we are more ignorant than knowledgeable about that. I think that in order to know this, we might have to know a person's journey from beginning to the present moment ~~maybe. I do notice that when I have one or two cups of coffee too many, I'm like a magpie and I have to rein myself in. Also, there are many lonely people out there, especially the elderly, who might feel the need to talk a lot. Who do these people have to talk to? Some of them are shut-ins and some don't have family who come to visit, for the most part.

Arcturus Descending

I may be wrong here but that might depend on the individual him/her -self. I think that some of us at the moment when we are feeling compelled to talk, or are aware of that compulsion within ourselves, and are experiencing it through talk, can take a step back and realize where they are coming from, what it is which is triggering it, what fear, et cetera, and can bring it to a slow halt.

Yes but it need not be fear that compels us to talk - I know that you know that. Sometimes we are so excited to share something with someone for what ever reason that we can not contain that something we desire to share so we must get it out by sharing it - in turn talking about it. So many reasons to feel compelled to talk.

No, it need NOT be fear but at times it is fear. I personally think that talk at these fearful moments allow people to drown out their fearful thoughts and emotions. True, it is also about being joyful and not being able to contain ourselves, needing to share.

One reason for feeling compelled to talk I often wonder about: Why the hell do people offer their opinions at inappropriate times? I might add; and are not usually asked for their opinions in the first place. You know those times when you just want someone to listen to you but they insist on interrupting with an opinion.

For the most part, probably just trying to be helpful not realizing that in might just work in the opposite direction.Also, we are an opinionated people and I intuit that we like people to know that we know *stuff* and have answers to things.Yes, LISTENING is a lost art, I think. It is an art.If we really LISTENED, we would just LISTEN and let the person talk.

Just be sure to let it out in a safe place.lol

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz